Jean-Luc Van Laethem

Open-Label Phase III Trial of Panitumumab Plus Best Supportive Care Compared With Best Supportive Care Alone in Patients With Chemotherapy-Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE Panitumumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody directed against the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). We compared the activity of panitumumab plus best supportive care (BSC) to that of BSC alone in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had progressed after standard chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS We randomly assigned 463 patients with 1% or more EGFR tumor cell membrane staining, measurable disease, and radiologic documentation of disease progression during or within 6 months of most recent chemotherapy to panitumumab 6 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus BSC (n = 231) or BSC alone (n = 232). Tumor assessments by blinded central review were scheduled from week 8 until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included objective response, overall survival (OS), and safety. BSC patients who progressed could receive panitumumab in a cross-over study. RESULTS Panitumumab significantly prolonged PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.66, [P < .0001]). Median PFS time was 8 weeks (95% CI, 7.9 to 8.4) for panitumumab and 7.3 weeks (95% CI, 7.1 to 7.7) for BSC. Mean (standard error) PFS time was 13.8 (0.8) weeks for panitumumab and 8.5 (0.5) weeks for BSC. Objective response rates also favored panitumumab over BSC; after a 12-month minimum follow-up, response rates were 10% for panitumumab and 0% for BSC (P < .0001). No difference was observed in OS (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.22), which was confounded by similar activity of panitumumab after 76% of BSC patients entered the cross-over study. Panitumumab was well tolerated. Skin toxicities, hypomagnesaemia, and diarrhea were the most common toxicities observed. No patients had grade 3/4 infusion reactions. CONCLUSION Panitumumab significantly improved PFS with manageable toxicity in patients with chemorefractory colorectal cancer.

Phase III Trial of Bevacizumab in Combination With Gemcitabine and Erlotinib in Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

PURPOSE Treatment with gemcitabine provides modest benefits in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. The addition of erlotinib to gemcitabine shows a small but significant improvement in overall survival (OS) versus gemcitabine alone. Phase II results for bevacizumab plus gemcitabine provided the rationale for a phase III trial of gemcitabine-erlotinib plus bevacizumab or placebo. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)/week), erlotinib (100 mg/day), and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine, erlotinib, and placebo in this double-blind, phase III trial. Primary end point was OS; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate, and safety. RESULTS A total of 301 patients were randomly assigned to the placebo group and 306 to the bevacizumab group. Median OS was 7.1 and 6.0 months in the bevacizumab and placebo arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.07; P = .2087); this difference was not statistically significant. Adding bevacizumab to gemcitabine-erlotinib significantly improved PFS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.86; P = .0002). Treatment with bevacizumab plus gemcitabine-erlotinib was well tolerated: safety data did not differ from previously described safety profiles for individual drugs. CONCLUSION The primary objective was not met. The addition of bevacizumab to gemcitabine-erlotinib did not lead to a statistically significant improvement in OS in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. PFS, however, was significantly longer in the bevacizumab group compared with placebo. No unexpected safety events were observed from adding bevacizumab to gemcitabine-erlotinib.

Tivantinib for second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2 study

BACKGROUND Tivantinib (ARQ 197), a selective oral inhibitor of MET, has shown promising antitumour activity in hepatocellular carcinoma as monotherapy and in combination with sorafenib. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of tivantinib for second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS In this completed, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh A cirrhosis who had progressed on or were unable to tolerate first-line systemic therapy. We randomly allocated patients 2:1 to receive tivantinib (360 mg twice-daily) or placebo until disease progression. The tivantinib dose was amended to 240 mg twice-daily because of high incidence of treatment-emergent grade 3 or worse neutropenia. Randomisation was done centrally by an interactive voice-response system, stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and vascular invasion. The primary endpoint was time to progression, according to independent radiological review in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed tumour samples for MET expression with immunohistochemistry (high expression was regarded as ≥2+ in ≥50% of tumour cells). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00988741. FINDINGS 71 patients were randomly assigned to receive tivantinib (38 at 360 mg twice-daily and 33 at 240 mg twice-daily); 36 patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo. At the time of analysis, 46 (65%) patients in the tivantinib group and 26 (72%) of those in the placebo group had progressive disease. Time to progression was longer for patients treated with tivantinib (1·6 months [95% CI 1·4-2·8]) than placebo (1·4 months [1·4-1·5]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·64, 90% CI 0·43-0·94; p=0·04). For patients with MET-high tumours, median time to progression was longer with tivantinib than for those on placebo (2·7 months [95% CI 1·4-8·5] for 22 MET-high patients on tivantinib vs 1·4 months [1·4-1·6] for 15 MET-high patients on placebo; HR 0·43, 95% CI 0·19-0·97; p=0·03). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the tivantinib group were neutropenia (ten patients [14%] vs none in the placebo group) and anaemia (eight [11%] vs none in the placebo group). Eight patients (21%) in the tivantinib 360 mg group had grade 3 or worse neutropenia compared with two (6%) patients in the 240 mg group. Four deaths related to tivantinib occurred from severe neutropenia. 24 (34%) patients in the tivantinib group and 14 (39%) patients in the placebo group had serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION Tivantinib could provide an option for second-line treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and well-compensated liver cirrhosis, particularly for patients with MET-high tumours. Confirmation in a phase 3 trial is needed, with a starting dose of tivantinib 240 mg twice-daily. FUNDING ArQule, Daiichi Sankyo (Daiichi Sankyo Group).

Phase II Trial of Cetuximab in Combination With Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin in the First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE This phase II study investigated the efficacy and safety of cetuximab combined with standard oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin [FOLFOX-4]) in the first-line treatment of epidermal growth factor receptor-expressing metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS The activity of cetuximab plus oxaliplatin was investigated in colon cancer cell lines and xenograft models. In the clinical study, patients with mCRC received on day 1 of a 14 day cycle, cetuximab (initial dose 400 mg/m(2) during week 1, then 250 mg/m(2) weekly) followed by FOLFOX-4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1; leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 2, followed by fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) bolus then 600 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion during 22 hours on days 1 and 2). RESULTS The preclinical studies confirmed the supra-additive activity of cetuximab to oxaliplatin. In the clinical study, 43 patients were included, with a median age of 65 years (range, 43 to 78 years). Response rates (RRs) were 79% (unconfirmed) and 72% (confirmed), with 95% disease control. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) and median duration of response were 12.3 and 10.8 months, respectively. Ten patients (23%) underwent resection with curative intent of previously unresectable metastases. After a median follow-up of 30.5 months, median overall survival (mOS) was 30.0 months. Cetuximab did not increase the characteristic toxicity of FOLFOX-4 and was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION Cetuximab in combination with FOLFOX-4 is a highly active first-line treatment for mCRC, showing encouraging RR, mPFS, and mOS values. The treatment resulted in a high resectability rate, which could potentially result in an improved cure rate. This combination is under phase III development.

Fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer: long-term results of the EORTC 22921 randomised study

BACKGROUND EORTC trial 22921 examined the addition of preoperative or postoperative chemotherapy to preoperative radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer. After a median follow-up of 5 years, chemotherapy-irrespective of timing-significantly improved local control. Adjuvant chemotherapy did not improve survival, but the Kaplan-Meier curves diverged, suggesting possible delayed benefit. Here, we report the updated long-term results. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with clinical stage T3 or T4 resectable rectal cancer to receive preoperative radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy before surgery followed by either adjuvant chemotherapy or surveillance. Randomisation was done using minimisation with factors of institution, sex, T stage, and distance from the tumour to the anal verge. Study coordinators, clinicians, and patients were aware of assignment. Radiotherapy consisted of 45 Gy to the posterior pelvis in 25 fractions of 1·8 Gy over 5 weeks. Each course of chemotherapy consisted of fluorouracil (350 mg/m(2) per day intravenous bolus) and folinic acid (leucovorin; 20 mg/m(2) per day intravenous bolus). For preoperative chemotherapy, two courses were given (during weeks 1 and 5 of radiotherapy). Adjuvant chemotherapy was given in four cycles, every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival. This analysis was done by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00002523. FINDINGS 1011 patients were randomly assigned to treatment between April, 1993, and March, 2003 (252 to preoperative radiotherapy and 253 to each of the other three groups). After a median follow-up of 10·4 years (IQR 7·8-13·1), 10-year overall survival was 49·4% (95% CI 44·6-54·1) for the preoperative radiotherapy group and 50·7% (45·9-55·2) for the preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy group (HR 0·99, 95% CI 0·83-1·18; p=0·91). 10-year overall survival was 51·8% (95% CI 47·0-56·4) for the adjuvant chemotherapy group and 48·4% (43·6-53·0) for the surveillance group (HR 0·91, 95% CI 0·77-1·09, p=0·32). 10-year disease-free survival was 44·2% (95% CI 39·5-48·8) for the preoperative radiotherapy group and 46·4% (41·7-50·9) for the preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy group (HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·79-1·10; p=0·38). 10-year disease-free survival was 47·0% (95% CI 42·2-51·6) for the adjuvant chemotherapy group and 43·7% (39·1-48·2) for the surveillance group (HR 0·91, 95% CI 0·77-1·08, p=0·29). At 10 years, cumulative incidence of local relapse was 22·4% (95% CI 17·1-27·6) with radiotherapy alone, 11·8% (7·8-15·8) with neoadjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy, 14·5% (10·1-18·9) with radiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy and 11·7% (7·7-15·6) with both adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p=0·0017). There was no difference in cumulative incidence of distant metastases (p=0·52). The frequency of long-term side-effects did not differ between the four groups (p=0·22). INTERPRETATION Adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemotherapy after preoperative radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy) does not affect disease-free survival or overall survival. Our trial does not support the current practice of adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. New treatment strategies incorporating neoadjuvant chemotherapy are required. FUNDING EORTC, US National Cancer Institute, Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique, Ligue contre le Cancer Comité du Doubs.

Phase III Trial Comparing Protracted Intravenous Fluorouracil Infusion Alone or With Yttrium-90 Resin Microspheres Radioembolization for Liver-Limited Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Refractory to Standard Chemotherapy

PURPOSE Liver dissemination is a major cause of mortality among patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Hepatic intra-arterial injection of the beta-emitting isotope yttrium-90 ((90)Y) bound to resin microspheres (radioembolization) delivers therapeutic radiation doses to liver metastases with minimal damage to adjacent tissues. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized phase III trial in patients with unresectable, chemotherapy-refractory liver-limited metastatic CRC (mCRC) comparing arm A (fluorouracil [FU] protracted intravenous infusion 300 mg/m(2) days 1 through 14 every 3 weeks) and arm B (radioembolization plus intravenous FU 225 mg/m(2) days 1 through 14 then 300 mg/m(2) days 1 through 14 every 3 weeks) until hepatic progression. The primary end point was time to liver progression (TTLP). Cross-over to radioembolization was permitted after progression in arm A. RESULTS Forty-six patients were randomly assigned and 44 were eligible for analysis (arm A, n = 23; arm B, n = 21). Median follow-up was 24.8 months. Median TTLP was 2.1 and 5.5 months in arms A and B, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.72; P = .003). Median time to tumor progression (TTP) was 2.1 and 4.5 months, respectively (HR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.94; P = .03). Grade 3 or 4 toxicities were recorded in six patients after FU monotherapy and in one patient after radioembolization plus FU treatment (P = .10). Twenty-five of 44 patients received further treatment after progression, including 10 patients in arm A who received radioembolization. Median overall survival was 7.3 and 10.0 months in arms A and B, respectively (HR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.78; P = .80). CONCLUSION Radioembolization with (90)Y-resin microspheres plus FU is well tolerated and significantly improves TTLP and TTP compared with FU alone. This procedure is a valid therapeutic option for chemotherapy-refractory liver-limited mCRC.

Eradication of Barrett’s mucosa with argon plasma coagulation and acid suppression: immediate and mid term results

Background—Intestinal metaplastic mucosa in Barrett’s oesophagus can be replaced by squamous epithelium after mucosal thermal ablation associated with acid suppression therapy. Aims—To assess whether restoration of squamous epithelium can be obtained after ablation of Barrett’s oesophagus using argon plasma coagulation (APC) associated with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. Methods—Thirty one patients with Barrett’s oesophagus received APC. Omeprazole (40 mg/day) was given from the first APC application to one month after completion of the treatment, then given symptomatically. Twenty four hour pH-metry was performed during endotherapy. Results—Complete re-epithelialisation was visualised at endoscopy in 25/31 patients (81%) after a mean number of 2.4 APC sessions (range 1–4). Only partial squamous re-epithelialisation was observed in three patients and three others had no eradication. At histological assessment, eradication of Barrett’s oesophagus was only confirmed in 19/31 patients (61%) due to the presence of a few residual Barrett’s glands under the new squamous epithelium. Complete eradication was related to a Barrett’s oesophagus segment length of less than 4 cm and the absence of circumferential extension but not to the normalisation of oesophageal acid exposure under PPI therapy. Seventeen patients with apparently complete endoscopic and histological eradication of Barrett’s oesophagus were re-evaluated at one year; eight (47%) disclosed relapsing islands of Barrett metaplasia despite continuous omeprazole therapy (10–40 mg/day). Conclusions—APC combined with 40 mg omeprazole daily can eradicate Barrett’s mucosa with apparent squamous re-epithelialisation in the majority of patients even in the absence of normalisation of oesophageal acid exposure. However, one year after endotherapy for Barrett’s oesophagus, relapse is frequent but limited in extent.

Effect of chemoradiotherapy vs chemotherapy on survival in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer controlled after 4 months of gemcitabine with or without erlotinib the LAP07 randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE In locally advanced pancreatic cancer, the role of chemoradiotherapy is controversial and the efficacy of erlotinib is unknown. OBJECTIVES To assess whether chemoradiotherapy improves overall survival of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer controlled after 4 months of gemcitabine-based induction chemotherapy and to assess the effect of erlotinib on survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In LAP07, an international, open-label, phase 3 randomized trial, 449 patients were enrolled between 2008 and 2011. Follow-up ended in February 2013. INTERVENTIONS In the first randomization, 223 patients received 1000 mg/m2 weekly of gemcitabine alone and 219 patients received 1000 mg/m2 of gemcitabine plus 100 mg/d of erlotinib. In the second randomization involving patients with progression-free disease after 4 months, 136 patients received 2 months of the same chemotherapy and 133 underwent chemoradiotherapy (54 Gy plus capecitabine). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was overall survival from the date of the first randomization. Secondary outcomes were the effect of erlotinib and quality assurance of radiotherapy on overall survival, progression-free survival of gemcitabine-erlotinib and erlotinib maintenance with gemcitabine alone at the second randomization, and toxic effects. RESULTS A total of 442 of the 449 patients (232 men; median age, 63.3 years) enrolled underwent the first randomization. Of these, 269 underwent the second randomization. Interim analysis was performed when 221 patients died (109 in the chemoradiotherapy group and 112 in the chemotherapy group), reaching the early stopping boundaries for futility. With a median follow-up of 36.7 months, the median overall survival from the date of the first randomization was not significantly different between chemotherapy at 16.5 months (95% CI, 14.5-18.5 months) and chemoradiotherapy at 15.2 months (95% CI, 13.9-17.3 months; hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.79-1.34; P = .83). Median overall survival from the date of the first randomization for the 223 patients receiving gemcitabine was 13.6 months (95% CI, 12.3-15.3 months) and was 11.9 months (95% CI, 10.4-13.5 months) for the 219 patients receiving gemcitabine plus erlotinib (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.97-1.45; P = .09; 188 deaths vs 191 deaths). Chemoradiotherapy was associated with decreased local progression (32% vs 46%, P = .03) and no increase in grade 3 to 4 toxicity, except for nausea. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this open-label, randomized trial involving patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer with disease controlled after 4 months of induction chemotherapy, there was no significant difference in overall survival with chemoradiotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone and there was no significant difference in overall survival with gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine plus erlotinib used as maintenance therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00634725.

Interleukin 10 prevents necrosis in murine experimental acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND/AIMS Inflammatory events are believed to play an important role in the pathogenesis of acute pancreatitis. Interleukin 10 (IL-10) recently emerged as a major anti-inflammatory cytokine, inhibiting the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines by monocytes and/or macrophages. The potential protective role of IL-10 in a model of acute necrotizing pancreatitis in mice was tested. METHODS Animals received two intraperitoneal injections of either 1000 U recombinant IL-10 or control supernatant before and during induction of acute pancreatitis with repeated cerulein injections (seven intraperitoneal injections of 50 micrograms/kg at hourly intervals). RESULTS Systemic amylase and lipase release peaked 9 hours after the first cerulein injection. This peak was significantly reduced by IL-10 treatment. Histologically, edema and inflammation of the pancreas were observed in both groups, whereas necrosis was dramatically reduced in IL-10-treated animals. Serum tumor necrosis factor levels were undetectable in this model; reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction analysis of resected pancreatic tissues performed at the time of maximal morphological alterations showed a dramatically decreased expression of tumor necrosis factor alpha messenger RNA after IL-10 treatment compared with control pancreatitis. CONCLUSIONS IL-10 is able to decrease the severity of experimental acute pancreatitis, mainly by inhibiting the development of acinar necrosis. Inhibition of local tumor necrosis factor alpha might explain, at least in part, the protective effect of IL-10.

Clinical Usefulness of EGFR Gene Copy Number as a Predictive Marker in Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated with Cetuximab: A Fluorescent In situ Hybridization Study

Purpose: To evaluate the usefulness and the pitfalls inherent to the assessment of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene copy number (GCN) by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for outcome prediction to cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer. The value of testing KRAS mutation status, in addition to EGFR GCN, was also explored. Experimental Design: FISH analysis of 87 metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with cetuximab was done, recording individual GCN per cell and using different samples per tumor. Performances of published cutoff points and different summaries of EGFR GCN distribution were assessed for response prediction. Results: In our data set, two published cutoff points performed less well than in their training set, yielding positive predictive values and negative predictive values between 40.0% and 48.3% and between 81.0% and 86.5%, respectively. Among summaries of GCN distribution explored, mean and right-tailed distribution of GCN yielded the highest performances. A mean EGFR GCN ≥2.83 provided an area under the curve of 0.71. Important heterogeneity of repeated measures of mean EGFR GCN was observed within tumors (intraclass correlation, 0.61; within-class SD, 0.40), leading to potential misclassifications of FISH status in 7 of 18 (38.8%) patients if a cutoff point were used. In multivariable analysis, EGFR GCN testing provided significant information independent of the KRAS status to predict response (P = 0.016) and overall survival (P = 0.005). Conclusions: We confirm the association between increased EGFR GCN and outcome after cetuximab. However, because of reproducibility concerns, any decision making based on published cutoff points is not warranted.